G.R. No. L-5424
THE UNITED STATES vs. PRUDENCIO SOTO
October 27, 1909

FACTS:
On the night of August 20, 1906, Prudencio Soto requested his neighbor, Saturnino Nicanor, to allow his 16-year-old daughter, Clara Nicanor, to sleep at Soto’s house to accompany his sick wife, as Soto claimed he would be away gambling. Saturnino agreed. Later that night, Clara woke up and found Soto’s wife unresponsive. Soto then approached Clara, embraced her, tried to lift her skirt, and attempted to pull her onto the floor, persisting in his attempt to lie with her despite her resistance. Clara cried out for help, causing Soto to release her. Clara then lit a match, saw Soto in an adjoining room in his undershirt, and Soto, acknowledging his guilt, begged for her pardon. Clara, upset, left the house, went home, and informed her father. Her father went to Soto’s house but he was already gone. The next morning, Clara filed a complaint with the justice of the peace.

A complaint for attempted rape was filed against Prudencio Soto. He pleaded not guilty, presented an alibi, and offered a document allegedly signed by Clara expressing no complaint. The trial court, however, found him guilty of attempted rape and sentenced him to four years, two months, and one day of prision correccional. Soto appealed the judgment.

ISSUE:
Whether Prudencio Soto is guilty of attempted rape as defined by the Penal Code, considering his actions and the evidence presented.

RULING:
Yes, Prudencio Soto is guilty of attempted rape. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.

The Court held that the crime of attempted rape was committed because Soto made a beginning in the commission of the crime directly by overt acts (embracing Clara, attempting to lift her skirt, trying to pull her onto the floor, persisting in his intent to lie with her), and did not perform all the acts of execution which would constitute the crime due to a cause or accident other than his own voluntary desistance, specifically Clara’s resistance and cries for help.

The Court dismissed Soto’s defense of alibi due to lack of credible evidence and rejected the document signed by Clara, noting she was a minor, signed without her father’s assistance or full knowledge of its contents, and was likely influenced by the municipal president to prevent prosecution. Clara’s immediate complaint to her father and the authorities, corroborated by her father’s testimony, established the crime and Soto’s guilt.

The Court also found the aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence (Article 10, paragraph 10 of the Penal Code) present, as Soto took advantage of the trust placed in him by Saturnino Nicanor, who allowed his daughter to stay in Soto’s house. No mitigating circumstances were found to offset this. Furthermore, under Act No. 1773 , crimes like this are prosecuted de oficio, and a pardon from the aggrieved party does not extinguish liability unless a subsequent marriage occurs, which was not possible as Soto was a married man.

Therefore, the judgment appealed from was affirmed, and the penalty of four years, two months, and one day of prision correccional was imposed in its maximum degree, along with accessory penalties.